<p>“Fifty-six percent of those who identified as uninsured in a new poll conducted in February by the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation, a research institution, had an unfavorable view of the health care reform law, compared to just 22 percent who said they view it favorably. The uninsured now see Obamacare less favorably than they did when the enrollment period began in October. As recently as September, more uninsured approved of the law than disapproved.”</p>
<p>“They do float bonds and pay interest + principal amounts by using the tax revenue”</p>
<p>But that is tax revenue they get from local property taxes, not the state, no? </p>
<p>Do district residents get to vote on their school budgets in Texas? </p>
<p>I read the NYT cover to cover every day. It is not the “liberal rag” people seem to believe it is. I think those who think that don’t read the Times. </p>
<p>Substitute teachers are a per diem, non-contracted temporary position. I simply cannot see the financial logisticss of ever offering this type of position health insurance. My district begs for subs. One year of college is the prerequisite and that drops by spring if they need breathing bodies to fill a classroom.</p>
<p>In recent years my state passed a law that any building projects over 2 mil? needed voter approval. I think that’s a great thing as it gives some accountability from the school to the community. I’m not up for funding huge stadiums or astroturf.</p>
<p>Most of my clients that are teacher aides make approximately $11,000/yr. It’s easy to say “give them health insurance”, but offering $15,000 health insurance for an $11,000 job doesn’t balance things well if you’re the one responsible on the financial end of things. Many/most? of those for whom this job is financially viable are obtaining their health insurance through a spouse.</p>
<p>Non-certified personnel (aides, cafeteria workers, and bus drivers) can obtain our school’s insurance, but subs cannot.</p>
<p>Because gosh, the school nurse or bus driver isn’t worthy of benefits. Everyone knows those should be reserved for full-time teachers and administrators. And certainly not para-educators. Nope. Wouldn’t want to give them benefits. Even if they are working 35 hours a week. </p>
<p>Legally, it does not matter. Anyone who averages 30+ hours/week for ~12 weeks is entitled to health care benefits. What your district or employer labels that person is irrelevant.</p>
<p>"To determine whether or not a part-time employee qualifies for benefits, districts can choose a 3-12 month “look-back period.” If the average hours worked in this “measurement period” come to 30 or more, the employee is eligible for benefits in the next ‘stability period.’ " - </p>
<p>"Though “Obama Care” doesn’t go into effect for most districts until January 2015, it’s that look-back measurement period we talked about that makes 2014 important. Districts on a calendar year will need to look 3-12 months back into 2014 to average out employee (including substitute) hours and determine if they’re eligible for benefits. </p>
<p>emilybee and I think we should taxes or use state govt surpluses to pay for health benefits for those that work more than 30 hours a week in the public school districts.</p>
<p>Bluebayou, since this issue was brought up by you, you are with us, right? </p>
<p>“But that is tax revenue they get from local property taxes, not the state, no?”</p>
<p>The schools are getting something like a third from the State and any bonds they sell need to be financed out of the annual budget they have from both State and county taxes. I currently pay 1.20% for my local school. </p>
<p>dstark - I hope not, at least not for medical school! I am committed to a transfer of my retirement fund at 61k per year to California for 4 years. A local friend with a kid in med school complained he is transferring it at the rate of 77k per year. :p</p>
<p>Where are the school districts with budget surpluses? Our district has been screaming about needing money since my kids were in elementary school.</p>
<p>Texaspg, yeah. That is a lot of money. I guess I am lucky my kids were older and the undergrad costs
were lower. When I first signed on CC, I used to complain about 40,000 a year. :)</p>
<p>So, even if a sub replaces a maternity leave, full time, he or she likely won’t work an average of 30 hours/week over the lookback. How many hours do cafeteria staff work? </p>
<p>Now I’m confused. What does this mean? How is it different from other hourly workers? They are not contract workers but directly employed by the school district? If they are directly employed by the school district and they work 30+ hours, they should be getting benefits. And so should other employees who work 30+ hours.</p>
<p>Substitute teachers do not work a regular schedule so how many hours they will work is unknown. They are paid by the day. I think it would be rare (lucky) to hit 30 hours but in some districts it may happen. They get called in when a teacher is out.</p>
<p>Sorry, but no. (Our company is doing the same thing - limiting part-timers to <30 hours – and I don’t believe that the governors should receive more than the governed.)</p>
<p>Yes it is a perverse incentive, but that is by design of the ACA. </p>
<p>Not “if they work 30 hours”- like, have a few full weeks or replace a maternity leave.<br>
But: work an average of 30 hours/week over the lookback. And the lookback is 3-12 months. The advice to school districts is to keep 2014 records of each sub’s aggregating hours. If they have some auto call list, they just manage this. (Advice from the district’s position, that is.)</p>
<p>Speaking of perverse incentives - A doctor mentioned being surprised that a previously ininsured staff member got a subsidized 79$/month deal with a deductible of 250 while the doctor’s premium is quite high with a deductible of 2500.</p>